Is WashU underrated?

<p>The OP has a good point. On the measures that matter most to undergraduate students, WashU consistently ranks in the top ten.</p>

<p>2010 stats:</p>

<h1>6 Selectivity</h1>

<h1>8 Faculty Resources</h1>

<h1>3 Financial Resources</h1>

<h1>3 Quality of Life (Princeton Review)</h1>

<p>Conspiracy theories aside, WashU’s rise to prominence has coincided with a series of wildly successful fund-raising campaigns. During the 80s, WashU raised $630.5 million, which was then the most successful college fund-raising effort in national history. In the late 90s, the University netted $1.55 billion. WashU has used these financial resources to significantly increase the quality of its students, faculty, facilities, and research initiatives. </p>

<p>The role of fundraising in WashU’s rise to prominence is outlined in this article from the NY Times:
[A</a> Mighty Fund-Raising Effort Helps Lift a College’s Ranking - NYTimes.com](<a href=“A Mighty Fund-Raising Effort Helps Lift a College's Ranking - The New York Times”>A Mighty Fund-Raising Effort Helps Lift a College's Ranking - The New York Times)</p>

<p>hoyasaxa1-
Don’t believe everything you read on Wikipedia. It is not a legitimate authority (can you imagine citing to it in a paper you submit at GU? The very suggestion is laughable.) ALL schools that are not HYPS (and maybe a couple of their equals) waitlist (or even reject) many applicants whom many would describe as “top candidates.” That’s just standard admissions practice, because they look at more (and are looking FOR more) than just superb test scores and transcripts. Tufts in particular looks at the applicants’ essays, because being accomplished academically - while a big plus in one’s favor - is not sufficient to get one in. The Tufts adcom carefully builds a class of students that they think will be interesting.<br>
By the way, I trust you know that even Harvard rejects or waitlists half (or maybe more) of applicants with perfect 1600 SATs, presumably for similar reasons.</p>

<p>WCAS–thanks for the caution about Wikipedia…no need to worry–my point was that it is a well established phenomenon–Tufts Syndrome, that is—and it is a VERY different approach to wait-listing students than you describe. No, Harvard does not wait-list students because they worry that they will not come and therefore negatively effect their yield if given an offer of admission. And I can assure you that Georgetown does not do that either (by the way, I worked on the admission committees as an undergraduate at Georgetown, and I have subsequently graduated and work as an alumni interviewer for GU–you can relax, never referenced Wikipedia on any GU paper or medical article I have written). Tufts Syndrome is a well-established, albeit disgusting, practice that went on (and probably still does) at Tufts and other “let’s improve our stats” schools. It is absolutely not the driving principle for waitlisting students at other, more respectable admission offices.</p>

<p>I know you are connected to Tufts, so I am sure it is not pleasing to hear of such practices. Maybe you and other alumni could encourage a more upstanding approach to admissions, if the practice is continuing.</p>

<p>That’s nice that you can assure us Georgetown doesn’t do it, it doesn’t prove at all that the others do. Although I bet you cannot prove that G’town doesn’t waitlist some highly qualified applicants. I bet if I look through some of the past threads, I will find students with stats as good or better than some who got in that got waitlisted. Oh, but wait. That doesn’t prove anything either since one cannot know if anyone on here is telling the truth. Imagine that.</p>

<p>You can allude to all the rumor, innuendo and speculation you want. I am sure Wickipedia also has articles about the Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories, the 9/11 conspiracy theories, and many others. So what? It is easy to impute base motivations to every move someone makes. It doesn’t make it true. It really is hard to imagine that these schools go to all this trouble for a stat that is something like 1% of the USNWR scoring.</p>

<p>By the way, a little honesty in your mention of the Wicki article would be nice. They don’t actually cite the name “Tufts Syndrome” in the article and they clearly use the word “supposed” as in:</p>

<p>

Not even a citation to back any of it up. Highly scholarly call on your part, hoya.</p>

<p>Fallenchemist: Type in “Tufts Syndrome” in Wikipedia, Urban Dictionary, google it or whatever–you will see the truth that you so clearly want to deny or ignore. Why so much resistance to the truth? I cannot state whether Tufts continues to engage in this practice. Yes, many students with very strong academic credentials are waitlisted or denied at Georgetown every year (as is the case at other top schools); in fact, it is often the case that when you compare the test scores/class rank statistics of the 3500 or so accepted students at Georgetown to the next 3500 students who were not offerred admission (waitlisted and denied), those NOT offerred admission are often higher than those who were offerred. However, it is not part of “yield protection” or “Tufts syndrome”–it is part of the SUBJECTIVE evaluation of the process (at Georgetown, committees rate applicants on a 10 point scale, 5 points for academics and 5 points for personal). Unlike Tufts, which strategically waitlisted candidates to determine their interest and consequently lower their acceptance rate and protect their yield. Basically, there would be a candidate who the school WANTS and who deserves to be admitted but instead is WAITLISTED to determine if that student actually wants to be at Tufts (and isn’t simply using Tufts as a back-up to Harvard, Amherst, etc.). Mind you, this was a practice discussed by personnel in the Tufts admissions office years back. Keep in mind, Tufts had a HORRIBLE yield in the '80s and '90s in the range of 25% and has, through Tufts syndrome/yield protection, moved that up to the Class of 2014 yield of 35% (still not great, but definitely better). I don’t know why you are so reluctant to accept the reality of this–remember, Tufts is not alone in doing this–there are many great schools that have fallen victim to our country’s obsession with rankings–these institutions have become “rank whores” (institutions like Wash U (read the NY Times article), Tufts, Tulane, and some even say U. Chicago, etc) and have been successful in their pursuit of climbing the rankings at the cost of character and ethical practice.</p>

<p>Oh, now I know why you expressed so much dismay about my comments, Fallenchemist—you are a Tulane fan/affiliate/alum—another school that has engaged in questionable practices to boost their numbers (“more applications than any university in the country”–here, apply for free, no essay, count an inquiry as an application, etc.).</p>

<p>You know, Duke also makes their essays optional. Does that mean they are a shady school. Last time I checked, they aren’t.
P.S. To criticize somebody and insult them just because they like Tufts just shows how cocky you are. Last time I checked, Tufts is a great school.</p>

<p>BTW, Tufts Syndrome was created by kids who are just mad that they didn’t get into Tufts. NO admissions officers believe it. To cite wikipedia, urban dictionary, and what other peer edit sources available is really stupid. In fact, Georgetown has some crazy definitions. Hmm I wonder if they are true. [Urban</a> Dictionary: georgetown](<a href=“http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=georgetown&page=2]Urban”>Urban Dictionary: Georgetown)</p>

<p>I see Hoya, you know G’town does it as part of the SUBJECTIVE evaluation of applications, but you KNOW that Tufts doesn’t or didn’t because you read all this stuff on the internet. BTW, I did type “Tufts Syndrome” into Wiki and it redirects you to the exact quote I posted. Where it clearly says “supposed” with no evidence or citations. That is what you want to hang your hat on? That and Urban Dictionary? And you are a college student? Oh well. Your comment about Tulane just proves my point. I know exactly what their thinking and strategy is for their approach, and it has nothing to do with improving their % admitted stats. If that were the case, they would be cringing at the low yield. They are, actually, totally aware that trying to manipulate a 1% stat is hardly worth the many thousands of $ they spend contacting this huge number of students and foregoing the app fee. In fact, it had everything to do with A) recovering from Katrina, and now B) attracting higher quality academic students, which has been exactly what has occurred. You see some internet ramblings and a few numbers and think you know exactly what must be the school’s intent. In fact, you know absolutely nothing regarding this issue.</p>

<p>You also have your facts wrong. They do require a “personal statement”, an essay by any other name…, and they do not count inquiries as applications. You just made that up too.</p>

<p>You are wrong, fallenchemist, about the facts. I am not basing THE FACTs about Tufts from Wiki or urban dictionary–my reference to those resources was to validate the mere existence of the phrase “Tufts Syndrome”–not to validate the process to which it refers. Additionally, I am no longer a college student (in medical school), and I have worked in college/graduate admissions at 3 prestigious universities and have met with HUNDREDS of admissions officers at NACAC, including representatives from Tufts, who confirm the process existed (although they suggest that it does not occur in MOST of the current review of applicants, i.e. it is not institutional policy). And as for Tulane, yes, they have had to come up with creative ways to deal with the Katrina tragedy; however, over the last years, I know DOZENS of prospective students in the Washington, DC metropolitan area who were SOLICITED to apply to Tulane, had the application fee waived and essay requirement dropped to encourage the applications, received DENIAL letters when they had not even submitted an application, and often, despite the solicitation and submission were denied (so soliciting the applicants, having them apply for free, waiving the essay, only to deny them? Doesn’t sound like a way to attract top students; sounds more like a way to boost applications). Enough said.</p>

<p>Again, you have your facts wrong. The fee wasn’t waved, they don’t charge anyone an application fee and haven’t for at least 5 years. Dozens, sure. OK. Denial letters without applying. Sure. OK. Tulane sends out maybe 100,000 mailers, probably more. There are about 3.2 million high school seniors, that means at least 320,000 that are in the top 10% of their class, and that number grows when you add high test score achievers. That’s Tulane’s target segment. Why aren’t they claiming 100,000+ applicants, then? I will let people judge the credibility of your statements for themselves.</p>

<p>Tell us the names of the people at Tufts you talked to. Let us confirm this for ourselves.</p>

<p>Hoyas, </p>

<p>You’ve expended nearly ten thousand words on this thread alone, and you’ve failed to provide any valuable insight beyond your waitlist-conspiracy theory. WashU’s rise to prominence resulted from strong investments in student quality, faculty, facilities, research initiatives, and a strong emphasis on merit aid and quality of life (see aforementioned NY Times article). To say that WashU jumped in the rankings because of some nefarious yield manipulation (which BTW is not a factor in the rankings!) is patently absurd. Go spread your flames elsewhere. Judging from your post history, it has been a few days since you’ve unleashed nonsensical diatribes against Duke and Cornell.</p>

<p>^such thin skin, and such difficulty with the truth. Why do you take the facts so personally; I am clearly hitting a nerve.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>You have NOT listed a single fact. Only your own mindless speculation, including using urbandictionary as a source.
What a joke.</p>

<p>hoyasaxa1-
Your posts reflect arrogance, sloppy “research,” condescension and naivete. These make for a very bad combination. I hope you outgrow them because they are especially unappealing qualities in a physician.</p>

<p>Without reading through this entire thread, has no one thought “■■■■■”? And one who is beating the same ol’ tired ■■■■■ drum. Why feed it?</p>

<p>^Because if it is a ■■■■■, it should still be pointed out because of prospectives reading this forum who may think it’s legit.</p>

<p>WCASParent–I know you are upset about my comments because of your affiliation with Wash. U.–but that doesn’t justify name calling and also doesn’t mean the comments I made are untrue or unsubstantiated. You know nothing about me and to describe me as you did and suggest that I need to grow up only shows your own insecurities and inability to address the facts. Not appealing qualities in a parent.</p>

<p>Hoyas, </p>

<p>The comments you’ve made on this thread are both untrue and unsubstantiated.</p>

<p>Furthermore, we know a lot about you. For example, four minutes before you self-righteously scolded WCASParent for name-calling, you called someone a “nasty, arrogant, insecure blue devil” on the Duke thread. Give me a break.</p>

<p>hoyasaxas-
Wrong again. I have no affiliation with WashU. As it happens, however, I do hold a degree from Georgetown (which makes me a “Hoya” too - a distinction I am embarrassed to share with you). I just read your posts and call 'em as I see 'em, and Gatsby’s post, above, seems to nail you.</p>

<p>Lets just face it, hoyasaxas is totally immature…about everything. He’s quite selective about what he posts. Rather than being constructive, which is the mission of College Confidential, he is destructive. He selectively chooses threads where he can bash on Duke. In fact, if you look at almost every single thread that somewhat relates to Duke he writes on, he says that Duke is bad in this way or that. In fact he says this “The reputation of Georgetown undergraduates at the top firms/banks, particularly in finance, is extremely strong (as strong as Penn, Harvard, Columbia, better than Duke).” when there is NO PROOF that Georgetown is better than Duke business. What is actually really funny is that GRADUATES of Georgetown Business COMPLAINED about it: [Georgetown</a> University: Full-Time MBA Profile ? BusinessWeek](<a href=“Bloomberg - Are you a robot?”>Bloomberg - Are you a robot?)
While Duke graduates didn’t: [Duke</a> University: Full-Time MBA Profile ? BusinessWeek](<a href=“Bloomberg - Are you a robot?”>Bloomberg - Are you a robot?)
Not to mention that all the rankings going back to the LAST DECADE support that Duke is a much better business school.
It’s also funny how Georgetown people **disagree **with Hoxasaxa’s explanation/exaggeration of Georgetown…hmmm you represent your school really well.
Also, he bashes anyone who says something that they don’t like about Georgetown (as evident in the thread above).
So to bash on people who point out the flaw in your argument (i.e. horrible sources such as urban dictionary and your tendency to denounce people) shows how you are totally stubbornly immature.
I should also mention that one almost every thread he comments on, there are always people who criticize his rudeness/ignorance/stubbornness (<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/george-washington-university/1000853-gw-party-scene-school-spirit-3.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/george-washington-university/1000853-gw-party-scene-school-spirit-3.html&lt;/a&gt;, <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/boston-college/1002526-would-idiotic-apply-bc-my-backup-school.html#post1065640828[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/boston-college/1002526-would-idiotic-apply-bc-my-backup-school.html#post1065640828&lt;/a&gt;, <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/american-university/980284-chances-admission-au-2.html#post1065635359[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/american-university/980284-chances-admission-au-2.html#post1065635359&lt;/a&gt; just to name some</p>